Omega Owners Forum

Chat Area => General Discussion Area => Topic started by: Nickbat on 02 January 2010, 23:38:07

Title: RAF Cottesmore
Post by: Nickbat on 02 January 2010, 23:38:07
In a cost-cutting move, RAF Cottesmore – the current home of three Harrier squadrons – will be closed. Perhaps they should close Westminster..it would save more and have less effect on our nations' defence.  :(

http://www.peterboroughtoday.co.uk/news/RAF-Cottesmore-to-close-Harriers.5913272.jp

Not that it is likely to do any good, but you can petition against the closure here. I just did.

http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/SAVECOTTESMORE/

 >:( >:( >:( >:(
Title: Re: RAF Cottesmore
Post by: al brown on 02 January 2010, 23:45:44
The harriers are going out of service anyway. Dont agree as we dont have the replacement yet. Eurofighter was meant to replace them in Afgan but cant do the job, so tornado has gone (Euro was its replacement!!). Cuts are gonna be made in the military and the Gov will make them where it thinks they will be least noticed. Afgan need helicopters, think that is the line these days
Title: Re: RAF Cottesmore
Post by: al brown on 02 January 2010, 23:49:15
I work on Chinooks, by way of authority. We do need more of them, but to keep the fight over there going we also need the harrier. Scrap the Eurofighter waste of cash. I know it provides more jobs to the euro zone than Harriers replacement, but when was the last time we fought an air war. Harrier supports the ground troops in a way no other Uk aircraft can.
Title: Re: RAF Cottesmore
Post by: Entwood on 02 January 2010, 23:58:06
Unfortunately many of these idiots who control spending actually believe their own claptrap.

At a briefing 18 months ago ( I was still in then) an Air Marshall and member of the Procurement Directorate actually said... "The best aircraft in the world is the Eurofighter and therefore the Air Force is getting the best" ... when we asked him to define "best" in terms of "ground war / troop support / logistics support" he was totally flumoxed and kept talking about "air superiority" .... when we pointed out that as Hercules Operators in Afghanistan we already had "air superiority (on the grounds the Taliban have no aircraft)... he told us we had no idea of the "big picture" and left... well it meant the bar opened earlier I suppose...  :)
Title: Re: RAF Cottesmore
Post by: al brown on 03 January 2010, 00:00:47
Where you a teckie entwood. The bar comment is why I ask.
Title: Re: RAF Cottesmore
Post by: ChevetteNick on 03 January 2010, 00:04:14
I don't understand your argument tbh. On the one hand you claim Westminster as a waste of cash (rightly as well imo), yet are happy to petition against the closure of an RAF base that is duplicating another one. Looking at the sizes of the bases on the old interweb I can't see Wittering being able to house 3 extra squadrons anyway.
Title: Re: RAF Cottesmore
Post by: al brown on 03 January 2010, 00:12:22
I understand we need to develop tomorrows aircraft yesterday, but look at the current cost of euroF/fast jet against operational use. We of the chinnok/helicopter world were told (last year!!, in Afgan!!!) we are a spot on the pimple when it comes to importance.
Fast jet is the way forward and they will not be told otherwise.
They spew numbers and facts, but still the true heros keep loosing their lives. I dread to think how many things we could by for the cost of 1 eurofighter (a product of cold war thinking).
Title: Re: RAF Cottesmore
Post by: Entwood on 03 January 2010, 00:19:20
Quote
Where you a teckie entwood. The bar comment is why I ask.

Nah ... Aircrew .. :) 38 years as an air engineer on Hercs .... :)
Title: Re: RAF Cottesmore
Post by: al brown on 03 January 2010, 00:26:27
Thanks, I will have my inflight meal now.
And a drink!!
Title: Re: RAF Cottesmore
Post by: al brown on 03 January 2010, 00:29:50
I am a prop/airframe tech on chinooks
Title: Re: RAF Cottesmore
Post by: Entwood on 03 January 2010, 00:31:32
Quote
I am a prop/airframe tech on chinooks

Someones got to keep the giant eggwhisks in the air .... after all .. a gearbox failure would take them straight to the scene of the accident .. :)
Title: Re: RAF Cottesmore
Post by: al brown on 03 January 2010, 00:31:34
I know it was the loadmasters job to serve food, but I am bitter and twisted as I failed sel;ection for air eng for migrane
Title: Re: RAF Cottesmore
Post by: Entwood on 03 January 2010, 00:32:59
Quote
I am a prop/airframe tech on chinooks


and I said air engineer ... NOT air loadmaster .... I couldn't cope with the drop in pay or the requirement to actually speak to the "walking freight"

:)

EDIT : cross posted .. :)

BTW .. hope you don't have to go to 'Stan too often ... :(
Title: Re: RAF Cottesmore
Post by: Vamps on 03 January 2010, 00:34:15
Quote
I am a prop/airframe tech on chinooks

I was someting like that on 'Wasps' ..... :y
Title: Re: RAF Cottesmore
Post by: al brown on 03 January 2010, 00:43:47
Quote
Quote
I am a prop/airframe tech on chinooks


and I said air engineer ... NOT air loadmaster .... I couldn't cope with the drop in pay or the requirement to actually speak to the "walking freight"

:)

EDIT : cross posted .. :)

BTW .. hope you don't have to go to 'Stan too often ... :(

once or twice a year. Plus the other BITS we do
Title: Re: RAF Cottesmore
Post by: al brown on 03 January 2010, 00:45:08
Wow, wont be using yellow again. Sorry
Title: Re: RAF Cottesmore
Post by: Entwood on 03 January 2010, 00:47:45
Just take care out there ... OK ???   :y :y :y

My best man was an ex air eng then crewman on the egg whisks .. now a civvy instructor at Benson .. :)
Title: Re: RAF Cottesmore
Post by: al brown on 03 January 2010, 00:54:03
my bro is at Benson
My bro in law always says take care out there. I always ask which side of the blast wall do I stand when the bombs come in.
Title: Re: RAF Cottesmore
Post by: al brown on 03 January 2010, 00:55:02
Been here since 99, might know him
Title: Re: RAF Cottesmore
Post by: Entwood on 03 January 2010, 01:03:47
Tim Saxby ... came from Hercs as an Air Eng when the rotary fleet was short of crewmen, found his niche in life and eventually remustered to crewman... did the Instructor thing ... ended up as STANEVAL.... I think he went Pumas for a while .....  been out about 6 years ... maybe 8.
Title: Re: RAF Cottesmore
Post by: al brown on 03 January 2010, 01:13:47
how we hate staneval. Makes life hell for us. Mind I do think it is a good idea. Puts the crew on there toes for a change.